I was fascinated to watch the reaction among some well-known home educators to my daughter's heterodox views on home education, as expressed in the Guardian recently. Now you must remember that these are people who contrive to give the impression that they are fighting to protect home educated children from the oppressive power of the state. One might have thought that they would be pleased to hear the views of a genuine home educated young person; one who had never spent a single day in school. Not a bit of it! To appreciate this fully, you have to realise that I am not talking about a few random strangers, but people who are very well known in the world of British home education; they run groups, write blogs, send letters to the papers, make Freedom of Information requests to the Department of Education, submit evidence to select committees, that sort of thing. I shall not name them because this seems to irritate people; I am accused of 'naming and shaming'. However, the guilty may look into their own hearts!
As many realise, the opposition to any increased regulation of home education in this country is often coordinated via Internet lists and also by communicating on twitter. It was on twitter that some really awful opinions were being expressed, opinions which provided a window into the true nature of some of these staunchest advocates of the right of children to have their opinions respected. One woman made a sleazy and misogynistic joke about my daughter, a play on words about 'Balls' and called her a 'little tart'. My daughter responded vigorously, pointing out the sexism inherent in this remark. This prompted another home educating mother to describe my daughter and me as 'a pair of c**ts'. What an extraordinary thing for a home educating mother to say of a sixteen year old home educated girl who had expressed an opinion about home education! The tweeter who had called her a tart agreed with this description. Then began a series of exchanges between six prominent home educators in which she was variously called 'a sad little troll' and an 'attention seeker'. (This last was a bit rich, coming from a woman whom it is impossible to avoid tripping over in the comments section of any online article on home education!) There followed doubts being expressed as to whether she really is sixteen or was even home educated.
Two things strike one about all this. The first is that almost all the stuff posted on the Internet about home education is by parents. Parents who claim to be speaking on behalf of their children, it is true, but parents never the less. All the comments posted on Ed Balls' article in the Guardian last week were adults; nearly all seemed to be parents. My daughter was the only home educated young person to say anything there. One gets the distinct impression that most of the parents there would rather keep the whole home education debate in their own hands, without home educated children and young people muddying the waters by expressing their own views on the matter! As soon as a real home educated youth pops up to say something, she is dismissed as a 'cunt', 'little tart', 'sad little troll' and 'attention seeker'. This, I think, says a great deal about how these people really view children and young people, even home educated ones.
The second thing which occurs to me is this. I have regularly been mocked by some home educators for being a lone voice; the 'only' home educator who agreed with Badman. Where are all the other home educating parents who feel as you do, I have been asked rhetorically. Well I think that quite a few of them keep well clear of the established home education scene in this country because they know that there are some pretty unpleasant types to be found there. A year or two ago there were a few people on some of the Internet lists who had varying opinions to most of those who post there. All have gone now. Some were made to feel unwelcome, others were bullied and driven off by some of the same parents who were being so abusive on twitter recently. Parents who join these lists soon learn that if they do not go along with the majority view, then they are liable to be ostracised and incur disapproval. A similar thing happens at some home education groups. I had an email recently from somebody who posts here from time to time. She has been frozen out of her local group because she told everybody that she hoped that her seven year old son would be taking examinations in a few years. Since these parents are often facing negativity from those who send their children to school, the prospect of also being frowned upon by fellow home educators is sometimes too much. I also know this to be true, because when I posted on HE-UK, I would not infrequently receive private emails from folk who agreed with me but did not like to say so publicly for fear of the reaction. Perhaps we need to remember what John Stuart Mill said about the 'Tyranny of the Majority'.
I hasten to add that my daughter is well able to stand up for herself and in fact her response was as forcefully expressed as anything I could have said myself. It has given me food for thought though. Ian Dowty recently suggested that home educators might consider compromising to the extent of agreeing at least with registration. Up went the predictable cry of 'No surrender'. One would get the impression that home educators were completely united in not giving an inch on this question. And yet, as I have mentioned before, when opinions were collected anonymously as responses to the Badman review, a third of home educating parents were in favour of registration. The reason that these parents are not speaking out publicly is almost certainly because they do not want to be abused and insulted by some of the more gung ho members of the home educating community. We have seen what happens when even a young girl from a home educating family says publicly that she agrees with this idea; one shudders to think what these characters would say to a mother or father who dared to speak out like that!
Tuesday, 10 August 2010
Silencing other views
Labels:
Ed Balls,
firebird2110,
Guardian,
home education,
Maire52,
Ruth O'Hare
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is truly disgusting that a young person would be treated this way by adults professing to care about children. Even I was shocked and I've seen some real nastiness among HE'ers.
ReplyDeleteMrs Anon
The substantial body of research relating to human behaviour suggests that a group of people can be united on one issue but fight like cats and dogs over another. That people stereotype and generalise and villify. They form in-groups and out-groups depending on how threatened they feel. Groups are dominated by those who shout loudest.
ReplyDeleteThe behaviour you describe is human behaviour, and is nothing to do with the fact that the people who engage in it happen to be educating their children at home.
What are you proposing should be done about it, if anything?
Ditto here....
ReplyDelete"What are you proposing should be done about it, if anything? "
ReplyDeleteNothing at all, suzyg. It just struck me as ironic when a group of people who have defined themselves as being desperately concerned about the rights of children and young people should behave in this way. If these had been parents who send their children to school, it would hardly have been worth mentioning. It was the fact that these individuals are home educating parents who are, in public, very concerned about young people which made it amusing. There is also the wider point, that some home educators are made to feel uncomfortable about letting others know their views. I know of a woman who allows visits from the local authority, but keeps quiet about it in case she is viewed as a Quisling by other home educating parents!
I agree that people are wrong to make personal insults of the kind you have described. We are entitled to our opinions and free speech is usually a wonderful thing, but there there should be limits (imposed by our own moral compass).
ReplyDeleteHowever, Simon writes,
"And yet, as I have mentioned before, when opinions were collected anonymously as responses to the Badman review, a third of home educating parents were in favour of registration."
In the Home Education - registration and monitoring proposals consultation, people were asked 'Do you agree that a register should be kept? 2105 home educating parents answered and 338 agreed with this proposal, so 16%, not a third. In fact, taking all respondents together gives an overall total of 16% agreeing. The results were even lower for all the other questions about the information to be provided on registration or should parents be responsible for maintaining the register. For example when asked if they agreed with the suggested visit schedule, less than 7% of HE parents and 7% overall agreed.
You have expressed doubts about the respondents to this questionnaire in the past. Suggesting that people could respond more than once, for instance. Well, the same obviously applies to all responses, both positive and negative.
Simon wrote,
"We have seen what happens when even a young girl from a home educating family says publicly that she agrees with this idea; one shudders to think what these characters would say to a mother or father who dared to speak out like that!"
A rhetorical question presumably, because we've seen their responses to you.
Simon wrote,
"It just struck me as ironic when a group of people who have defined themselves as being desperately concerned about the rights of children and young people should behave in this way."
I suspect they have much more concern about the rights of their own children than yours. Obviously this does not excuse their behaviour, but as others have said, protection of offspring is just another aspect of normal human (or even animal) behaviour rather than something peculiar to home educators. Humans are just as likely to leap to their child's defence if they see them being bullied by an older, bigger child as they are if they were being bullied by an adult, for instance.
Well, I'd never call another woman a tart or a c***t - far less a girl of sixteen. I think that's vile.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things I've noticed is that exchanges on the internet are very prone to over-statement and rudeness. Interestingly, that's the sort of exchanges that get picked up and responded to - and so the whole debate gets a bit OTT.
There were also many comments that congratulated your daughter on her ability to put forward robust and well considered views, saying that she was a great example of a home educated person - one who could conduct herself competently in an adult forum.
ReplyDeleteWhether that support stretches as far to include your daughter telling those on Twitter to 'Fuck off' is a different matter entirely.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"I know of a woman who allows visits from the local authority, but keeps quiet about it in case she is viewed as a Quisling by other home educating parents!"
I'm really surprised by this because my impression is that the majority of known home educators accept visits. I've lived and visited home-ed groups in about 6 different LAs and this seems pretty much accepted as normal. Maybe she lives in a particularly militant area!
I too find it sad. I'm sorry that she was treated that way - the same way many home educators on the same page were being treated. And unlike someone else's daughter - who apeared on a forum about a year ago and was found out - she never tried to conceal who she was or just stick up for someone else's views. I was impressed that she put her head above the parapet and expect that she is made of stern stuff and we will hear from her again.
ReplyDelete"Whether that support stretches as far to include your daughter telling those on Twitter to 'Fuck off' is a different matter entirely. "
ReplyDeleteNot true, I'm afraid. All the tweets are available to public view; just check out firebird2110 and Maire52 about a week ago. Firebird2110 tweeted, 'She says she loves balls, the little tart'. My daughter responded angrily by enquiring, 'How the fuck is that appropriate. Nice slut shaming.' Slut shaming is a feminist term, I dare say some on here will understand this. She was furious about this aspect of the tweet, rather than the personal dig. Firebird2110 then responded by telling my daughter to fuck off. other chipped calling my daughter and me a pair of cunts and so on.
"A rhetorical question presumably, because we've seen their responses to you."
ReplyDeleteIndeed yes, it was meant rhetorically!
"In the Home Education - registration and monitoring proposals consultation, people were asked 'Do you agree that a register should be kept? 2105 home educating parents answered and 338 agreed with this proposal, so 16%, not a third. In fact, taking all respondents together gives an overall total of 16% agreeing."
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely true and just shows how unwise it is to shoot one's mouth off without checking back on the original data!
"It just struck me as ironic when a group of people who have defined themselves as being desperately concerned about the rights of children and young people should behave in this way."
ReplyDeleteHow have a couple of individuals who made offensive comments about your daughter 'defined' any sort of group?
Didn't mean to imply that your daughter had done the wrong thing by telling them to 'Fuck off', especially in the light of the deeply offensive comments aimed at her.
ReplyDeleteIn light of those comments it is incredible (all credit to her, in the face of such an onslaught would many others done the same?) that your daughter, upon asked not to be abusive, then apologised even though (I did not read any further as I find Twitter too complicated), from what you've written, the abuse aimed at your daughter was worse than anything she had said in her defence and I suspect no one apologised to her for their shameful attacks.
"How have a couple of individuals who made offensive comments about your daughter 'defined' any sort of group?"
ReplyDeleteInteresting point, suzyg. I certainly did not mean the group 'home educators'. These are women who tend to describe themselves as spiritual earthmothers and stuff like that. They often express great concern for children and young people and are very worried about bullying. Two of them took their children out of school due to bullying and talk about this topic a lot. I found it deliciously ironic to watch them try and engage in bullying with my daughter. (Not that my daughter is prone to being a victim of such things, as can be readily seen from her response to the misogynistic comment made initially.)
I always find it entertaining when people who claim to be one thing then behave in a completely different way when they think nobody is looking. For example look at my profile on this blog. It begins, 'I am an irritable, middle aged man'. You see, you get exactly what it says on the tin! If I had described myself as a spiritual earthfather who is endlessly patient and unfailingly good natured to every fool he meets, then this would have been funny. Why? Because it is at odds with what people see of me on the Internet. So it was that I was amused to see gentle and caring mothers who are concerned about home education and anxious about bullying, agreeing that me and my daughter are a pair of cunts. Surely you can see the funny side to that?
"Didn't mean to imply that your daughter had done the wrong thing by telling them to 'Fuck off',"
ReplyDeleteAs I said, my daughter did not tell anybody to fuck off, as can easily be verified by checking twitter. She vcertainly used the word fuck', but to express her outrage at the word 'tart'. This is a subject about which she feels very strongly. indeed, many women might well be impelled to enquire 'What the fuck?' if some random stranger used the word tart in connection with them. This is different thought from the agressive action of telling somebody to 'fuck off', which is of course what firebird2110 said.
"Interesting point, suzyg. I certainly did not mean the group 'home educators'. "
ReplyDeleteThat's good.
your daughter is a traiter to home educators Webb and we all know what happens to traiters dont we?
ReplyDeleteSimon said
ReplyDelete'This is different thought from the agressive action of telling somebody to 'fuck off', which is of course what firebird2110 said.'
The word was 'FUCK' - capitalised, therefore shouting.
The word is aggressive under any circumstance, whether used under duress, made in response to a subject about that which one feels strongly or in everyday banter. To capitalise the word in response to someone whilst writing makes its use an aggressive action.
(Before you object, in written form there is a distinction between lower case and UPPER CASE. Even the use of capitals can be seen as aggressive.)
With regards to your contention that slut shaming is a feminist term - I had always thought feminism was about empowering women.
In what way does the term 'slut shaming' achieve this end as, from what I have read, it is a way of demeaning other women and making them appear a lesser being than the speaker?
""Whether that support stretches as far to include your daughter telling those on Twitter to 'Fuck off' is a different matter entirely. "
ReplyDeleteMine does.
I’ve spent 15 years on American abortion debate boards, without being coy about my own backstreet abortion, arguing for choice, so I’ve heard some really despicable things said that attacked the person rather than the point. Even so the reaction to Simone’s posts was shocking.
Stooping as low as they did with a teenager was disgusting, regardless of how volatile the debate is, regardless of how desperately they wanted to give her cause to shut up and leave them the floor in public forums for the sake of presented a undivided front.
So yes, I can cut a lot of slack for a 16 year old using a “WTF”, bearing in mind the vile insults aimed at her by a little gang of so called adults.
Short of an apology that is as public as the insults, I don't see how any of the adults involved can emerge with either dignity or credibility.
If instead they choose to jump up and down about her use of a “what the fuck” to try and distract or minimize their own words then, IMO, both their D and their C plummet even further.
Although I made an error in who used the F-word in what context (the whole thing happened a week ago and I did explain that I have difficulty with Twitter) my posts were supportive of your daughter and her actions which you chose to ignore.
ReplyDeleteCan't a girl catch a break around here for being nice?
Hi, Simone here: slut-shaming is a feminist expression in that it is anti demeaning women for promiscuity and sexuality. I think, Anon., you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick a bit. The expression "tart" used the way it was was "slut-shaming" in that female sexuality was treated as a negative thing. The word "slut" goes along with this, hence why feminists get very angry at its use. I was objecting to the tweet about me primarily because it was doing this. Slut shaming is a term used by feminists for the way women (sex workers, women who express their sexuality, etc) are treated by society.
ReplyDeleteThat's also why I was quite aggressive with my use of the word "fuck". I was angry, and felt entitled to be angry.
Hope this helps. :)
Ooh, and additionally - I'd like to thank the people on here who are being supportive of me: it means a lot. :)
ReplyDeleteCan't a girl catch a break around here for being nice? Hi, anon - my dad (who's eating dinner) asked me to pass on an apologetic message: he's been having to moderate comments atm, and gets a bit mixed up at times.
And Sarah - I admire your courage going on American abortion debate boards. I can only imagine how vicious they get. :/
Final point, which I feel I need to re-emphasise as it seems to be confusing people: I did not at any point tell anyone to fuck off. I was told to fuck off, true. I used the word fuck in a somewhat strident sense: I did not tell anyone to fuck off. Check the twitter exchange if necessary.
"your daughter is a traiter to home educators Webb and we all know what happens to traiters dont we?"
ReplyDeleteThought I would let one of Mr Williams' comments through, just to show why I have had to start moderating. His comments are becoming increasingly menacing and abusive. This is a real pain and the result is that some people's comments may not get through. I can't let this guy just post dozens of offensive and irrelevant comments at a time though; most consisting of just a couple of words.
"Can't a girl catch a break around here for being nice?"
Yes, I'm sorry about being so brusque! I did not really read your comment, for which I apologise. It's just that publishing or rejecting stuff from the moderation place is time consuming and annoying and sometimes I don't read things properly. I hope that I will be able to lift moderation again soon, as soon as Mr Williams of Alton realises that I am nothing at all to do with Hampshire County Council.
"And Sarah - I admire your courage going on American abortion debate boards. I can only imagine how vicious they get. :/"
ReplyDelete____
I am passing on a message from my husband ....
"Dis no da courage !!!! Iz do da masochist. E she wake me, at 3 of the mornink. For make da complain reguard da bad insult she no like. She no like, she come at the bed at time of the normal persons, she sleep, I sleep, every persons happy and in mornink she not grump and I not knackit."
Which is a highly inaccurate assessment.
Cos I am almost always in bed by 1.
Changing topics .... from Simone to Mr Williams... (and thus going against the rule I made not to comment on his comments) ...it is a pity he can't make some sensible posts. I am clearly not alone in finding the words and actions of some home educators incomprehensible at times (hence the debate above about Simone's treatment). Why does Mr Willimas seem to spend all his time encouraging his son to make formal complaints against Hants County Council? Doesn't he care that all he seems to be doing is making the LA think that his family (and perhaps all home educators) are literally mad? His approach (and those who make vulgar accusations against a 16 year old girl) cannot be doing the cause of HE any good at all, and perhaps untold harm.
ReplyDelete"These are women who tend to describe themselves as spiritual earthmothers and stuff like that."
ReplyDeleteSo do you define the group 'spiritual earthmothers', by the actions of 2 women? Why not just talk about nasty individuals instead of groups?
Well done for expressing your views Simone, even though I disagree with them!
"So do you define the group 'spiritual earthmothers', by the actions of 2 women? Why not just talk about nasty individuals instead of groups?"
ReplyDeleteI read it as a group, of some nasty individuals, who define themselves as spiritual earthmothers rather than spiritual earthmothers being defined by the group of nasty individuals.
Maybe he meant it that way ?
I don't really have anything at all against spiritual earthmothers per se! I just find something irresistably amusing about people who define themselves in that way and then behave, shall we say, rather differently. It is the same feeling which I might gain from watching a devout churchgoer picking somebody's pocket or perhaps a vegetarian tucking in to a hamburger. I certainly did not mean to condemn all spiritual earthmothers, nor tar them all with the same brush.
ReplyDelete"I read it as a group, of some nasty individuals, who define themselves as spiritual earthmothers rather than spiritual earthmothers being defined by the group of nasty individuals."
ReplyDeleteYes, you have summed the case up perfectly Sarah!
"So do you define the group 'spiritual earthmothers', by the actions of 2 women? Why not just talk about nasty individuals instead of groups?"
ReplyDeleteYou have persuaded me! A nasty individual is Ruth O'Hare, secret identity of the notorious firebird2110. She lives very comfortably in the stockbroker belt of Surrey and decribes herself as a: 'wool crafting, chicken keeping, chocolate loving, vegetarian gardener.' Aah, sounds like The Good Life! When such a person makes misogynistic jokes about 'balls' and 'little tarts', it is funny because of the contradiction between her projected persona and the real personality behind the persona. I think it was A Kempis who said that Man is the only animal who laughs, because he is the only animal that sees the difference between the way things should be and the way they actually are. This is what I was drivig at and I did not intend a blanket denunciation of either Earth mothers, the spiritual or for that matter wool crafters or chicken keepers!
Reading the above comment over, I am intrigued as to what a 'wool crafter' actually does? is this a New Age expression for knitting? Can anybody enlighten me about this, as I am very curious about it now. One also notices that the activities are all carefully chosen to create the effect of the Earth Mother type. Ms O'Hare designs websites as a business, but I observe that she does not include 'website crafting' alongside the chicken keeping and vegetarian gardening!
ReplyDelete